Globalisation and Localization

Bun fight over McDonald's move on Barossa Valley | News.com.au

ON one side are the Barossa Valley's wine barons and gourmets - on the other, the golden arches of McDonald's.

At stake is the image of Australia's most famous wine and food region, South Australia's Sunday Mail reports.

Plans by fast-food giant McDonald's to open a restaurant in Nuriootpa have upset some of the Barossa's most high-profile food and wine identities, including celebrity cook and food manufacturer Maggie Beer and wine legend Margaret Lehmann.

"We need to protect the culture of the valley that brings us so many tourists," said Ms Beer, the long-time Barossa champion whose TV show The Cook and the Chef was mostly filmed there. "We have to keep working on the Barossa as a gourmet destination.


"For me, McDonald's would be like a thorn in the valley's side. We would be seen as talking the talk, but not living the life."

McDonald's has its sights on land within view of Penfolds winery, on the corner of Barossa Valley Way and Railway Tce.

The McDonald's would be part of a $4.5 million regional bulk goods centre, called Barossa Hub, with retail space and warehousing.

Ms Lehmann, of Peter Lehmann wines, said the burger joint would just be "out of place". "I think it's sad," she said.

"We have a wonderful, unique food culture but McDonald's is exactly the same everywhere in the world; it irons out all the differences that regions produce."

Another person working to brand the Barossa Valley as a gourmet food region, Jan Angus, the founding chair of Food Barossa, said nearly a decade of work was threatened.

"The only way to keep that and preserve it is to continue to have that as a viable enterprise and that usually doesn't come about through globalisation," she said.

"What we have to look at is what is there about a McDonald's that the community want. If they're about clean toilets, cheap meals, parking and childcare can't we possibly do that and keep the food local?"

However a 763-member Facebook group "Let McDonald's come to the Barossa" wants the area to "get with the times".

Group creator Russell Payne, 19, of Sandy Creek, said Red Rooster and Subway had not dented the area's reputation.

"In a community which is largely dominated by rotating shiftworkers, a local place that is open very early to very late would make it easier on a lot of people," he said.

"The times are changing and the Barossa is expanding. The tourists will come and eat at the slow food places but the locals need the fast food option as these days people have to work harder and longer."

Local developer Ian Mader said his plan was about offering choice. He said other sites had been considered but the development at Nuriootpa was deemed the most appropriate for McDonald's.

"I understand that some members of the community may have reservations about McDonald's in the Barossa and their relationship with Barossa food, however there have been a great number of people who have expressed their support," he said.

Barossa Valley Council planner Paul Mickan said the project was yet to be approved.

A spokeswoman for McDonald's said the restaurant would create between 80 to 100 jobs, and give back to the community.

"Beyond the jobs created, a McDonald's also creates considerable sponsorship opportunities for local sporting or other community teams, clubs and events due to our operating philosophy of giving back to the communities in which we operate, as well as our franchise model," she said.

Tips Menghitung Konsumsi Listrik Alat Elektronik

JUALELEKTRONIK.com (source)

Tips Menghitung Konsumsi Listrik Alat Elektronik
Thursday, 15 October 2009 15:33 administrator
E-mail Print PDF

Menghitung Peralatan Elektronik Rumah Tangga

Mau tau cara menghitung tarif peralatan elektronik rumah tangga Anda ? Besaran tarif dasar listrik (TDL) yang diatur oleh PLN dibagi atas beberapa golongan:

Golongan R1 : (200 VA) 1 kwh = Rp. 320,-

Golongan R2 : (2200 VA – 6600 VA) 1 kwh = Rp. 575,-

Golongan R3 : ( > 2200 VA ) 1 kwh = Rp. 621,-

Dengan mengetahui besaran harga per kwh maka Anda dapat menghitung peralatan elektronik rumah tangga. Rumah tangga termasuk golongan R1. Misalkan peralatan elektronik microwave yang mempunyai kapasitas 800 watt, apabila digunakan selama 60 menit ( 1 jam), perhitungannya adalah 800 x 1 = 800 watt jam atau 0,8 kwh. Apabila besaran kwh-nya sudah diketahui tinggal dikali saja dengan harga satuan per kwh. Jadi kalau digunakan selama satu jam Anda harus membayar 0,8 kwh x Rp. 320,- = Rp. 256,-

Contoh lainnya adalah peralatan elektronik rice cooker yang mempunyai kapasitas 40 watt apabila digunakan selama 24 jam maka, 40 x 24 = 0,96 kwh. Dengan demikian Anda harus membayar kepada PLN 0,96 kwh x Rp. 320,- = Rp. 307.2,- J

Setelah Anda mengetahui cara menghitung peralatan elektronik rumah tangga, tentunya Anda dapat menghemat biaya pemakaian listrik. Ini tentunya dapat membantu meringankan beban Anda akibat naiknya harga BBM.

birth control

Rich nations to offset emissions with birth control | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Consumers in the developed world are to be offered a radical method of offsetting their carbon emissions in an ambitious attempt to tackle climate change - by paying for contraception measures in poorer countries to curb the rapidly growing global population.

The scheme - set up by an organisation backed by Sir David Attenborough, the former diplomat Sir Crispin Tickell and green figureheads such as Jonathon Porritt and James Lovelock - argues that family planning is the most effective way to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic global warming.

Optimum Population Trust (Opt) stresses that birth control will be provided only to those who have no access to it, and only unwanted births would be avoided. Opt estimates that 80 million pregnancies each year are unwanted.

The cost-benefit analysis commissioned by the trust claims that family planning is the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions. Every £4 spent on contraception, it says, saves one tonne of CO2 being added to global warming, but a similar reduction in emissions would require an £8 investment in tree planting, £15 in wind power, £31 in solar energy and £56 in hybrid vehicle technology.

Calculations based on the trust's figures show the 10 tonnes emitted by a return flight from London to Sydney would be offset by enabling the avoidance of one unwanted birth in a country such as Kenya. Such action not only cuts emissions but reduces the number of people who will fall victim to climate change, it says.

"The scheme, called PopOffsets, understands the connection [between population increase and climate change]," says the trust director Roger Martin. "It offers a practical and sensible response. For the first time ever individuals, companies and organisations will have the opportunity to offset their carbon voluntarily by supporting projects to provide family planning services where there is currently unmet demand."

In papers released with the launch of the offset scheme, the trust claims that reducing CO 2 by 34 gigatonnes would cost about $220bn with family planning, but more than $1tn with low carbon technologies. The 34 gigatonnes is roughly what the world emits in a year, and would be achieved by cutting the projected global population in 2050 by 500 million.

The world's population, presently 6.8 billion, is increasing by nearly 84 million a year. The growth is equivalent to a new country the size of Germany each year, or a city the size of Birmingham every week. It is expected by the UN to peak at about 9 billion people in 2050. By this time, UN scientists say global carbon emissions must have reduced by at least 80% to avoid dangerous rises in temperature, meaning the carbon footprint of each citizen in 2050 will have to be very low.

"The current level of human population growth is unsustainable and places acute pressure on global resources. Human activity is exacerbating global warming, and higher population levels inevitably mean higher emissions and more climate change victims," said Martin.

The giant carbon footprints of developed countries mean prevented births will save far more carbon than those in developing nations.

However, some development groups opposed the plan. "We are keen that any money raised [from offsets] help the poorest who are most vulnerable to climate change. [But] it would be misleading if it was spent in this way. It should go to [immediate] things like disaster risk reduction, food security and water," said Paul Cook, advocacy director of Tearfund, a faith-based development group.

Population control is highly contentious in rich and poor countries alike Some, such as Jonathon Porritt, the former Sustainable Development Commission chair, have said promotion of reproductive health is one of the most progressive forms of intervention. "Had there been no 'one child family' policy in China there would now have been 400 million additional Chinese citizens," he has said.

But other thinkers, such as the Guardian columnist George Monbiot, say global population increase pales into insignificance when compared with the effect of increased consumption and economic growth.

World Carbon Emissions

World carbon emissions, by country: new data released | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Which country is number one in carbon emissions? Up until very recently, it was the US - now, it is indisputedly China, as shown by this data.

These are the latest figures - up to 2007 - from the respected US Energy Information Administration. This has (literally) every country in the world on it and its emissions going back to 1980 — plus we've put on some handy percentage change data and ranking information.

The curious thing is, we've been here before. Last year we reported that China had overtaken the US in 2006. But if you look at the figures below, the change now appears to have happened in 2007. What's going on?

We asked the EIA and this is what they said:

Each year we review the underlying consumption data for petroleum, natural gas, and coal and the flaring data for natural gas and make any necessary revisions. These, in turn, affect our CO2 emissions estimates. I think that most of the change for China was due to revisions to our coal consumption data. Coal consumption is a calculated value based on production, imports, exports, and stock change and when measured in Btus is also affected by the types of coal consumed (i.e. anthracite, bituminous, and lignite). Data for the most recent year are often preliminary and most subject to revision but data for earlier years are also often revised.

Of course, these aren't all emissions - just consumption of engergy, which accounts for 60% of the total. But they give a good picture of what is going on.

Because of the interest, the EIA are going to come up with 2008 figures at the end of this year or early 2010. Then we will see exactly how fast China has grown. In the meantime, as we countdown to Copenhagen, these figures will become even more important.

We've added in the %-change since 1990 - the Kyoto benchmark. What can you do with the numbers?

Are You OK?